I know a few people who were laidoff during maternity leave, short term disability and out on PTO for more than 3 weeks. Shartz has no soul. Zero concern for anyone but himself and his bonus.
10 replies (most recent on top)
On the other side of the coin, we've seen examples where employees anticipate layoffs coming to their group and decide it's time for a surgery they've put off or go speak to someone who will sign-off on a mental health short term leave. As soon as the rumors start circulating you can see a higher number of people all going on leave.
To counter what some others have shared, in each round of layoffs that I've done in the past 3 years I was given very specific guidance to NOT layoff individuals that were on leave. If a planned termination was taking place and that employee went out on leave I had to wait until they returned. It didn't prevent them from being displaced but it did buy them some additional time. Sounds like this isn't always the case though.
what can or can't be done depends on the type of leave and how long you've been out. But mostly it can be done while out on leave, even if It is a "job protection" leave. All that means is they can't give your job to someone else because you're out and then tell you that there's no job for you. they can, however, eliminate the need for your job - I.e. displace you.
As someone in the chain above said - position eliminations are planned 2 to 6 months in advance, so things that happen on the date of notification like PTO, illness, family tragedy, etc don't factor into it.
What could they do differently here?
They layoff while on bereavement as well. Zero F’s given. Horrible company.
It IS business, which is why it's completely unnecessary for Shart to intentionally be such an insufferable lying c|_|n+ while he's conducting it.
@tgv+1vvZcUan good job anthropomorphizing a corporate entity. Does your car hate you too when its low on gas? This isn't your Mom's Ice Cream shop you're working at.
While we're on this note, displacements are decided on months in advance. No one can plan at this scale to be concerned with the minority few who will be on some non-standard work status.
News flash, if they did plan and give last minute concessions for these special status' everyone would be complaining about how they got laid off as a full time good RTOer and high achiever when Mary Jane Rottencrotch who can't echo Hello World gets to stay because she happened to be out recovering from bunion surgery. "Discrimination" would be screamed from the streets.
@ysj, there's a difference between 'love' and decency + respect
Why is it we think the company exists for us to make a living and they are responsible to make sure the pay is sufficient to meet our goals? It's a business transaction between you and the company and when that business transaction is no longer needed then the relationship ends..Period. You want love go home to your family but cease looking at the company for it.
Half the point of terms is to te--orize the survivors enough that they quit voluntarily and don't get a severance. What better way to do that then examples like this?
Yes, these people are evil. They'd quite literally rather see an employee die than get a severance. It's what safe and effective was all about.
But at the same time, at least they are consistent. Why should someone on leave get preferential treatment?